Russia’s Syria Proposal: Disarming Assad…or Obama?



Appearing on Russia Today’s CrossTalk, see here or click on video above, in advance of President Obama’s Tuesday address on Syria, Flynt described how the Obama administration’s “largely self-generated difficulties” on the Syrian issue had left Obama with no option but to “appear to be working with some seriousness with Russia to try and make [Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s] proposal work.”  As Flynt points out,    

“The administration was clearly getting desperate.  It has already lost almost all international support for its proposed strikes on Syria.  I think there is a very real chance that, certainly, the House was going to vote against the administration, and I think the Senate was getting close enough where it was even thinkable that someone who opposed the resolution could carry out a filibuster.  So the congressional option was drying up for Mr. Obama.  Now Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has very artfully taken advantage of the administration’s largely self-generated difficulties and put this diplomatic proposal on the table…If [Obama] doesn’t appear to be working with some seriousness with Russia to try and make this proposal work, the administration is really completely checkmated in Syria

As it is, if this diplomatic proposal does get some traction and details are able to be worked out that lets some version of it move forward, I think the critical achievement here—from a Russian perspective, from the perspective of many other players—the critical achievement here is you’ve gotten an administration that was operating more and more outside the bounds of international law, you’ve actually now potentially gotten them bound into a legal international framework for dealing with the Syrian conflict.  And I think that could have a lot of implications, diplomatically and on the ground, moving forward.”            

In the course of the discussion, Flynt elaborates some of the more important of these implications: 

“I think that the devil is going to be in the details.  And I expect that as the Security Council takes this up, as various other parties take this up, that Mr. Lavrov is going to pay a lot of attention to the details.  And I think his goal is going to be to use the negotiation of this agreement basically to get the United States to make as much of a commitment as he can extract that—if this deal is implemented, if Syria really does put its chemical weapons stocks under international supervision—that the United States is not going to strike.  And if the United States won’t agree to that, it makes it very clear that the real agenda driving Obama’s policy in Syria all along is not really chemical weapons, it’s not even really humanitarian considerations.  It’s other considerations. 

And so the administration will either be put in a position where it signs up to that and says, basically, OK, if we can address this chemical weapons issue the United States is not going to be using military force essentially to take sides in the Syrian civil war.  Or, if [Obama] doesn’t do it, then it’s the United States can’t take yes for an answer.”        

Flynt also discusses likely “winners and losers” from successful implementation of the Russian proposal (Iran, in his view, is among the winners) and how doing this deal will require Obama to walk back from his “very foolish position,” publicly declared in August 2011, that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “must go.” 

–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett


152 Responses to “Russia’s Syria Proposal: Disarming Assad…or Obama?”

  1. Karl.. says:

    I dont understand how Assad could agree to this, US robbing Syria off at gunpoint.

  2. Fiorangela says:

    If the “international community” can demand that Syria, which has not signed the Chemical Biological Weapons treaty and maintains “CBW ambiguity,” (as Assad broadly suggested in the Charlie Rose interview) surrender its chemical weapons, then does that establish a precedent whereby the same “international community” can and must demand that Israel surrender its nuclear weapons, which are similarly not bound under the NPT and about which Israel maintains “ambiguity?”

    Is an even more compelling case made to invoke that precedent to force Israel to enroll in NPT in light of the fact that Syria (and Egypt) had NOT signed the CWBW precisely because Israel had an uncontrolled arsenal of WMD against which its two neighbors believed they needed a deterrent?

  3. Karl.. says:

    Dream on hague, you are not going to bomb syrians.

    This is the Hague James canning says want better relations with Syria by the way..

  4. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    September 12, 2013 at 10:40 am

    If you look at the two historical analogues of the Warring Sates period – one in pre-Imperial China and the other in pre-Tokugawa Shogunate in Jpaan, you may conclude the opposite – that defensive alliances would be only temporary in nature and the only strategic option is to try to become the Hegemon.

    That is ths stable point – in the sense of theory of ordinary differential equations.

    There are 2 further ramifications:

    Firrst: the emergence of a planetary hegemon – in spite of its benefits such as univesal peace etc. – would be a disaster for humanity. That is because all human institutions decay and the decay of Univeral State (Hegemon) will bring decay and destruction on the scale of the entire planet. One need only look at the historical experience of dynastic China or the decay of Seljuks and others.

    Secondly: during the period of transition from the Warring States to the Universal State, EU states will almost certainly seek the protection of the United States and in the United States de facto cesarism will emerge.

    BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are too diverse to exert any coherent influence in the International Arena.

    Brazil is too weak, Russia and China have their own separate agenda, South Africa is a joke, and India – the Aspiring-Imperialist-in-Waiting – will not work against the United States.

    I would not “open an account on them” – as the Persian idion goes.

  5. BiBiJon says:

    That threat worked

    There are lot of folks out there who keep saying the threat of credible force, the eminence of attack, the menacing specter of warships waiting for the order to fire tomahawks is what sent Russia into a frenzy for desperately looking for a way out, and Syria to immediately accept the proposal.

    While I agree the threat, and naval maneuvers, and the chest beating worked, but I think it worked as all redlines, threats etc work, they reduce a player’s possibilities down to a single next move: attack.

    That Russia proposed a solution showed up the vacuousness of the Western powers whose collective humanitarian bleeding hearts and their war-addicted brains could not on their own come up with a peaceful solution; that their myopia did not foresee a trap, when they singled out alleged CW victims as cause for action and in the verbose process of justifying their inaction at the atrocities committed by both sides, they left the door open for Putin to catch the entire herd in his headlights with the ease of flicking on a switch.

    I guess they don’t understand there’s more to international credibility than what you do or don’t with Syria’s CWs.

  6. BiBiJon says:

    That threat worked


    The same brains of the universe are now trying to eek out a chapter 7 out of this. I guess I have to spell it out for you. Obama’s lame excuse was this ain’t his redline, it is the world’s red line. Well, how is it going to go down when the proverbial world refuses to endorse the red line at the UNSC?

  7. Karl.. says:


    Actually wasnt it Kerry himself that brought up the idea? Not Russia.
    Unfortunately it seems that threats like these works, imagine how Israel and hawks in the US will approach Iran next..

    People say Putin outplayed Obama, I hate to say that I think it is the opposite.

  8. fyi says:


    Dr. Cordesman on recent Syria development –

    [I think his conclusions are mostly sound.]

  9. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 12, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    “Actually wasnt it Kerry himself that brought up the idea?”

    Well yes, except for the fact that he was responding offhand toa reporter’s question, and that after Lavrov said that is a great idea, the state department released a statement that Kerry was speaking rhetorically, did’t mean it, was not a serious comment, definitely not a proposal.

    Did you read what I wrote. Do you want to remark on the points I raised? Or, you just want to make a statement: threat worked?

  10. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 12, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    The threat only worked to isolate Obama to a point where public opinion even in the US was running 2 to 1 against him. The threat worked to isolate Obama in G20 which he was hoping for support to counter the congressional revolt. At the G20, the threat ensured that neither EU nor Germany would even sign a letter condemning Assad. The threat worked to reveal the complete lack of objective in the proposed “unbelievably small” attack. It worked to leave Obama with only one move ahead: make good on the threat despite complete lack of support, or look like a fool. While it left the other players with a multitude of moves to counter it.

    It worked so well, only a moron would repeat it.

  11. Karl.. says:


    Simply that threats work, US not Syria and its camp are the winner of this. And why wouldnt US repeat such threats if they worked so good this time?
    Seriously you dont believe that US now will stop its war against Syria? Or that it will take force off the table? So again what have Syria achieved?

  12. James Canning says:

    I continue to think Russia is quite right to insist that any UNSC resolution on Syria not provide for an attack on Syria in event CW are not removed in a given period of time.

  13. James Canning says:


    The Russians and Americans discussed ways to achieve removal of Syrian CW, in St, Petersburg. And avoid US attack on Syria.

  14. Fiorangela says:

    BiBiJon, I don’t think Russia’s position changed in any way as a result of American temper tantrums.

    Russia has been saying at least since March 2012 that negotiation is the way forward, and that it is not the place of Russia or any other state to “choose sides” — Flynt would say, “enforce political outcomes.”

    Obama has been a child in a tantrum all those weeks and deaths while rational parent Russia attempted to mitigate the damage — to Obama as well as the Syrian people, to which Obama responded by holding his breath and smashing Mother’s best vase.

    Uri Avnery has written several times about the Jewish lore surrounding the “stop me or I’ll kill ’em” theme. Obama got to that point; Putin finally had to step in and pin his arms down until he could regain control of himself. [nb. ‘Obama’ is a stand-in for himself AND the US Congress AND the I lobby. Bandar and the Saudis have far different motives.]

  15. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 12, 2013 at 1:46 pm

    They cannot be physically removed in anything else than years.

    And who is going to receieve them? Russia? US? UK?

    The most practical way would be to destroy them in Syria – but that requires transfer of specialized plans to Syria for that purpose.

    Who will pay for them and who will supply them?

    Will US or EU break their own sanctions on Syria and permit the transfer of such furnances and control systems to Syria?

    If that course of action is taken, the fighting phase of the Syrian Civil War will have come to an end – with a de facto partition of Syria.

    Resistance can live with that outcome – I should imagine.

  16. James Canning says:


    I think the US and EU would pay for Russian CW disposal teams to be sent to Syria. Or certainly contribute to the cost.

  17. James Canning says:


    I entirely agree with Zarif that Obama was not keen on US attack on Syria, and that certain groups (and countries) wanted to entrap him into attacking Syria.

  18. James Canning says:


    I think Bashar al-Assad comprehends that Syrian CW are a threat to Syria.

  19. James Canning says:


    I have stated time and time again that Wiliam Hague wanted better UK relations with Syria WHEN CONSERVATIVES TOOK POWER (in coalition). A few years ago, in other words.

    I have also stated that Iran itself did a great deal to wreck Hague’s plans.

  20. James Canning says:


    And I oppose “threat of force” in any UNSC resolution on Syria.

  21. James Canning says:


    Interesting piece by Paul Richter in LA Times that you linked (last thread): “US and Iran are edging toward direct talks”. Aipac, of course, opposes any such communtications between US and Iran.

  22. Ataune says:


    Syria has, maybe temporarily but at least for now, been spared aerial bombardment and cruise missiles meant to be followed by regime change; The US administration’s political momentum in his frenzy march to military intervention has been broken; and you are nonetheless saying that Obama outplayed Putin. The mood I perceive in Damascus, Tehran, Moscow (check the op. ed. by Putin in NYT) is a sure sign that those players don’t share the same conclusions as you do. Unless you think that all three of them are mistaken or in complete denial, or they have different hidden motives to act this way, your assertion doesn’t make sense.

    Besides, we all witnessed that although US presented “legal” excuses when it launched its threats against Syria, tried to link it to the National Interests of the US and then to Iran “threat” – which she, wrongly, thought would be a winner with the public opinion – and had the support of important players in the middle-east and in and around Washington DC, the public opinion and the Congress shirked from backing him and ultimately made him eat crow. What makes you then think that in the current context, the administration will play the same game against Iran which is a much bigger and mightier challenge?

    What the Leveretts are recommending, and I believe they are correct in their assessment, is that the US needs a shift in its strategic vision of the Middle-East. It is more that probable in my eyes, that all the troubles different administrations are having since 15 years ago, but particularly at this stage, will soften America’s rather shaky resolve and push her towards multilateralism and maybe new friends in the region instead of radicalizing back to the Bush II times.

  23. Karl.. says:


    Well as I said, threats work, Obama threatend and in the end got what he wanted. If he hadnt done that, Syria wouldnt have given up its CW.
    Yes I think indeed there is a denial in those states or any person that this is win for the resistance-groups/states in the region or for Syria itself.

    I think its a case in point when you say that Syria has “been spared”, because the threats and a war would be illegal so we shouldnt try to legitimize what US are and tried to do, Syria shouldnt have done anything when illegal demands or threats are put upon them.

  24. paul says:

    The devil is in the details for sure. If the Chemical Weapons process turns into a defacto occupation of Syria, warmongers will be much encouraged. Putin and Lavrov must follow through here. They must ensure that whatever UN guidelines emerge allow no wiggle room for continuing threats of force. They must ensure that any intervention forces sent in are truly international and not basically Nato. They must, perhaps most importantly, equip Assad with advanced weaponry that will allow Syria to stave off future attacks, from the renegade forces and from heir sponsors. Will Russia follow through? Or will it throw Syria under the bus, having – barely – saved face?

  25. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    September 12, 2013 at 2:50 pm

    The Chemical Weapons in Syria re useless to the Syrian government – let the Axis Powers dispose of them – incurring the costs – and claim a victory.

    The important thing is that the Axis Power war plans against Syira and Iran are derailed for the time being.

  26. Ataune says:

    Syria has basically promised to sign the CWC like 99% of the State in the globe. There are procedures and protocols attached to this convention and respect of the sovereignty is the principal modus operandi.

    I do not believe that CW disposal was the ultimate goal of the US administration. Their goal, which has been badly challenged since the beginning, was to change the regime. This is in back burner now. That wasn’t the case right after 21st of August. At the time promoters of the “rebellion” were concocting a way to counter the inexorable defeat of the armed “rebels”. they thought they got their excuse, but their momentum was broken due to the circumstances I mentioned before.

  27. Karl.. says:


    Neither do I think that the CW is the “ultimate goal” it was however the public goal for the moment (yes regime change is the ultimate goal).


    Actually the war against Syria continues, today it was report that CIA transported arms to the rebels.

  28. Karl.. says:


    Yes something to back up Syria or secure it from attacks must be done unless as you say this thing was just about Russia itself..

  29. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 12, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    You’ll forgive me if I think it is probably pointless repeating myself. If you were going to read my reasons/points, and respond to them, you would have done that to my last couple of comments and my exchange with m. Ali in the previous thread.

    The threat succeeded only in making an absolute fool out of the US, UK, France and their supporters. If a threat is repeated, it is out of a measure of desperation, not because it was a success, that it was not.

    Bet you $10 no such threat will be issued in any part of what is Iranian/Russian sphere of influence ever again, unless they want all out war.

  30. James Canning says:


    I think many in Obama’s administration wanted regime change in Syria, but prior to Aug 21st it appeared Obama was willing to allow Syrian gov’t to prevail. CW event changed the dynamic.

  31. James Canning says:

    I agree with FYI the Syrian CW is of no value to Syrian gov’t. Ged rid of it.

  32. Ataune says:


    Though you were saying that the administration outplayed Russia and Iran.

    I believe the pretext was used to initiate a game-changer with US military intervention, without UN approval, and with the goal of shortly leading to the fall of the Syrian state (a la Liby.)

    In this scenario, and obviously with the help of the circumstances, the US admin has been outmaneuvered by Russia and Iran.

  33. Fiorangela says:

    Sharmine Narwani:

    Israel and Saudi Arabia are keenly aware that the age of American hegemony is fast declining, and with it, their own regional primacy. And no parties in the Mideast are more vested right now in urgently “correcting” the regional balance of power than Saudi Arabia and Israel.

    At the helm of efforts to “correct” the imbalance is Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud, the US’s longtime go-to man in Riyadh. Bandar ibn Israel, a terror Frankenstein, is now throwing funding, weapons and training at the extremist version of Islamist militants inside Syria.

    The sudden escalation of military threats by Washington against the Assad government is a result of pressures and rewards dangled by Israel and Saudi Arabia.

    so — it might be that Obama is in such a panic because Saudis may ally with Israel, at which point US will be thrown under the bus. Zionists do not just walk away from a former ally, they destroy it.

    = = =
    When Dennis Ross chartered and chaired JPPPI in 2002, one of the first papers produced was Schlomo Wald’s assessment of the possibilities of a Jewish-Chinese relationship. In a 2009 paper, Wald wrote that the Chinese would make good partners for Israelis/Jews (Wald wrote, “For the Chinese, Jews and Israel are the same.”) because

    “No holy books exist where the Jews are condemned for killing God’s son or rejecting Allah’s prophet. The Chinese word youtai (Jew) has no negative connotations. . . . Besides the Hindu world this is the only major civilization where the Jewish people can start from a neutral or even positive position.”

    http jcpa dot org slash article slash chinas-interaction-with-israel-and-the-jewish-people/#sthash.LDZs5IVy dot dpuf

    I thought that Jewish relations with Persia were long, deep, and favorable, with not “holy books where Jews are condemned” — quite the contrary.

    But resource wars make strange bedfellows, and it appears the youtai are prepared to overlook that Saudi thing with the book …

    The next 50-100 years will be interesting.

  34. Ataune says:


    That’s kind of a political spin we might hear from a backer of an administration beating a retreat.

  35. kooshy says:

    I think Mr. Putin’s cleaver Op-ed in NYT, was meant putting salting the wound specially where he ridicules Mr. Obama’s self-serving American “exciptionalism ( as RSH comments: this is exactly what I have been saying all along)

    But now the regimes spokesperson Mr. Carney sees feeling exceptional is justified because of the unmatched democracy his boss’s regime has imposed on the citizens of this country.
    For obvious reason Mr. CORNEY (Cheesy) wouldn’t like to be reminded of the type of democracy his boss is running which includes but not limited to, unconstitutional wiretapping, killing American citizens without due process or jailing them indefinitely, braking and not implementing international ratified treaties, etc. etc. at the end of the day it seems that Mr. Corney and his boss think not only the Americans as a country are exceptional, but their administration is even more exceptional than the nation therefore no need for them to stick to rules of the US constitution. And that wholesomely is what it makes our democracy unmatched on the planet.
    Again like RSH good luck with that BS

    “Obama team fires back at Putin op-ed on Syria”

    The White House fired back at Russian President Vladimir Putin for his op-ed article Thursday, saying Russia’s own actions prove that the United State is an “exceptional” nation.

    “Unlike Russia, the United States stands up for democratic rights,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney.

  36. nico says:

    “Technically, Israel signed the CWC in 1993 like most of the rest of the world, but it never ratified the treaty, citing Syria’s arsenal. Without Syria as an excuse, Israeli Foreign Ministry officials now say they won’t ratify the deal until everyone else in the world signs a peace treaty with them.”

    Obama where are you ?

  37. Karl.. says:


    Yes thats what I said (outplayed) even if were not intentional from the start.

    So you think Syria would have gave up its CW if there were no threats?

  38. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    1. Russia and Iran successfully “balanced” US and poodles. We have officially entered a multipolar balance of power world.

    For all the credit that Putin rightly deserves, let us not forget that as always “razmandegane Eslam” (three guesses as to who) has been keeping Syria from falling into the hands of the western kafer-takfiri-zionists for the last few years.

    I recall how when this whole crap started I clearly stated that Iran will never abandon its friend Syria and was “not well received” by some. Well, who’s the bitch now?

    2. The real question is: Does Obama genuinely believe in all the stuff he is/was saying and doing or is he completely clueless and just repeating what others have told him? This is a serious question we all need to answer as long as he’s still in charge.

    Who is this dude with his finger on the button? It just seems that he’s completely clueless on strategic/foreign policy.

    I mean after the monkey George W. Bush ANYONE seemed better, right?

  39. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 12, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    Strategically didn’t make a difference if they did or not, but now the burden of keeping/ destroy them is on someone else, plus since they were not and couldn’t use them any way even
    As a last resort to save Assad, no one can anymore accuse them that they use CW. That‘s why instead of Assad being disarmed Mr. Obama is disarmed at least for one of his excuses.
    For all good reasons O new this and accepted it, even though he knew as a result he will have to throw his EU/Arab/Liekud/Turk dogs under the boss, but in politics is always better them under the bus than his exceptional honor

    That to me was a nice job, cornering him, letting him go all the way to congress, getting even more in the corner in G20, then giving him the rope only enough to pull him out, but leaving his bodies in the hole.
    So next day, he is calling his Brit and French whores and telling them Oh by the way I forgot to tell you when we were in G20 I found the rope, so I got out isn’t that wonderful, how you are doing my jolly dear?

  40. Karl.. says:


    It was used as a deterrent against Israel.
    Rather the fact that Assad agree to this raise the notion pushed by Obama that he in fact were behind the attacks.

  41. kooshy says:

    This by itself is funny must watch as the Iranian proverb goes (Roo Keh Nist Sang Paye Ghazvine) this proverb’s translation to perfectly fit Mr. CORNEY would be (he’s excessive exciptionalism is more durable than Gahzvien’s lava rock)

  42. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 12, 2013 at 4:26 pm

    “It was used as a deterrent against Israel.’

    Why than he didn’t use it when he was attacked back in 07, and a few times this year, do you want to play BiBijon’s shooting game see if you were Assad you could use them?

    “Rather the fact that Assad agree to this raise the notion pushed by Obama that he in fact were behind the attacks.”

    Did you ask yourself why is it only you who thinks that way, that may be a self-serving way to justify why the west lost on this game, but majority of the world including UN inspector haven’t come to any conclusion that you may want to come to.

  43. Karl.. says:


    Why would he use CW on these small attacks? Makes no sense. Its like saying why dont Israel use on Gaza or Lebanon?

    Its not only me who thinks that way, and its certainly not the majority of the world who think that threats against Syria did not made them to give their CW up.

  44. Karl.. says:

    edit – “why dont Israel use nukes on Gaza or Lebanon?”

  45. Jay says:

    Jay says:
    September 11, 2013 at 8:26 pm
    James Canning says:
    September 11, 2013 at 7:31 pm


    Perhaps you inadvertently skipped over the following from the previous thread, or you responded and I did not see it.

    So, recalling the context of the discussion in the previous thread…


    Are you suggesting that the UK is incapable of taking a position on the merits of the issue independent of the position of other nations – specifically the US?

    If the UK is capable of taking a position on the merits, please articulate the justification, based on the merits, the position of the UK with respect to 20% enrichment.

    It seems to me that the absence of a response so far indicates that the demand is not justifiable on merit.

  46. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 12, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    “So you think Syria would have gave up its CW if there were no threats?”

    I think I understand where we diverge.

    You seem to think that all along US wanted Syria to abandon her CWs, that was their main beef. You appear to think for the last 2 and a half years US has been insisting that Assad surrender his CW and sign a CW treaty. Therefore you think once US threatened force, and ultimately Syria said OK take the CW, that the threat worked. Is that it?

    Well, now look at it this way. What if getting ri of CW was not even an issue. The first thing Obama ever said was: Assad must go. The only thing Obama condemned was the “brutal regime”. Much further ddown the time line, Obama said the only thing that would change his calculus about how far US will get involved in Syria was use of CW. Still nothing about getting rid of CW.

    After he boxed himself in with issuing a threat, and after he became isolated and humiliated by lack of support for his threat, after Russian warships arrived, after Iran issued counter-threats, after it became obvious short of starting a huge war, not even a single tomahawk could be lobbed at Syria, after he started backtracking with going to Congress for approval, suddenly a lifeline was thrown at him. How’s about we get rid of CW, so that you can have some small positive thing to show for all your humiliating effort.

    Now if you want to call this success, go ahead. But as many others have pointed out, Syria was motivated to get rid of the useless CW before any such threats.

  47. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 12, 2013 at 4:59 pm


    Like fyi or Smith you didn’t want to Play BiBijon’s shooting game because you know no matter how much Israel attacks you (Syria) conventionally you wouldn’t and can’t retaliate with CW, because you very well know if you do they are justified to use Nukes and that would be the end of you. For your own and god’s sake sometimes one would need to take it on the chin and not try to be clever with this bunch here, they have all discussed this too many times.

  48. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    September 12, 2013 at 5:06 pm

    Just a bunch of venal and gutless Barons surrounding a Mad King.

  49. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    September 12, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    It is called “Chutzpah” in Yiddish (a language that NAZIs killed.)

  50. Karl.. says:


    No you missunderstand, I just made clear that CW isnt the ulimate goal.

    Threats worked indeed, in getting something US and Israel wanted. I asked you before, you really believe that Syria would give up its CW if it werent for the threats? No they wouldnt thus “threat works”

    Yes its indeed a success for Obama, he surely thinks that, and in the end of the day its what these people think that matters regardless of what you or I think about it.


    I am not afraid of anyone “shooting game”. Trust me.

  51. kooshy says:

    fyi says:
    September 12, 2013 at 5:32 pm

    I rather think since Mr. Obama contrary to his campaign’s selling propaganda, was morally and financially bankrupt and incapable to provide any “Audacity for hope” he claimed he will bring to this nation. Therefore as the result, like his predecessors he ends up offering the usual cheap intoxicating replacement which is “audacity of exceptionalism”

  52. James Canning says:


    I think the UK will accept Iranian enrichment to 5%. France is opposed to any Iranian enrichment. As is the US, at least officially.

    What conceivable merit could there be, in pushing for agreement on enriching to 20, when it is a hard slog to get to 5?

  53. James Canning says:


    You are aware that Saeed Jalili told the Financial times that Iran’s enriching to 20 is no big deal. This is also FYI’s opinion.

  54. James Canning says:


    I agree Obama should say the US expects Israel to ratify the treaty on CW. (Assuming Syria does and gets rid of CW)

  55. James Canning says:

    Writing in the Financial Times, David Gardner suggests that the supposed raising of issue of how to get rid of Syrian CW and avoid an American atttack, was not raised clearly in St. Petersburg. Surely the issue should have been raised.

  56. fyi says:

    kooshy says:
    September 12, 2013 at 6:02 pm

    No you do not understand Protestant US; “Exceptional-ism” is baked-in into their “American Creed”.

    They are raised that way, they imbibe it, and they grow to believe it – in the North much more than the South.

    If you take it away from them they will be forced into accepting that US is another country just like the other 191.

    That is not palatable to them.

  57. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    September 12, 2013 at 7:12 pm

    You do not understand where Axis Powers position is; they want to make certain that Iran is not capable of assembling a nuclear weapon by putting limits on the quantity and quality of centrifuges in Iran as well as enrichment levels.

    They also want Iran to dismantle Arak reactor.

    These conditions will not be accepted by Iran.

    While the President of the United States may or may not have some flexibility on relaxing sanctions against Iran, that flexibility could easily be removed by US Congress.

    That is an undeliverable promise to Iran.

    Furthermore, there is snow ball’s chance in Hell that any new reactors of any type will be delivered to Iran in any reasonable time frame in lieu of TRR or AHWR – Axis Powers never delivered on their promises to Iran under NPT.

    In this sense also NPT is a dead letter – killed by US.

    The removal of sanctions would have been of some attraction to Iran in 2012 but not any longer as Iranians work their way through them.

    You have to understand that US has nothing positive to offer Iran, has not had for at least a decade.

    Everyone knows that – we just have this diplomatic dance which is meant to obfuscate the fact that no resolution of Iranian Nuclear File is possible.

    It matters not what Russia or China say – there is no substance in any of this.

    What Axis Powers and their local allies have achieved during Mr. Obama’s Presidency has been to complete the process of alienation of Iran from Axis Powers and their allies that began in 1980 with the Iran-Iraq War.

    We are now in the final phases of that as the Shia Crescent comes to pass as a geopolitical reality in the Levant and the Persian Gulf.

    Transactional relations with this alliance is still possible but not probable any time soon.

    The status quo ante of 2010, 2007, 2003 are no longer achievable.

  58. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Kooshy: “As a last resort to save Assad, no one can anymore accuse them that they use CW.”

    Not quite true…

    U.S. can’t prove Bashar Assad approved chemical attacks in Syria

    This article is propaganda for the notion that Assad doesn’t control his chemical weapons troops any more, and therefore it may be impossible to actually disarm Syria of its chemical weapons.

    The implication for derailing the agreement are obvious. And that’s why the article was published. The Obama administration is clearly trying to derail this agreement any way it can.

  59. Richard Steven Hack says:

    US struggles show hazards of chemical weapons destruction

    Actually it shows the US doesn’t want to give up its chemical weapons.

    But this sort of generally true article can also be used to derail the Syria CW agreement by making Syria seem reluctant to give them up, thus justifying more war threats.

    The problem is there is NO WAY that the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia are going to let the chance to attack Syria slip away because of some agreement Russia managed to engineer.

    People here who think Putin has won are wrong. People here who think Obama wanted this agreement are wrong. People here who think this is the end of the matter are wrong.

    This is just another move in a chess game where the attacker always has the initiative.

    Again, what happens if there is another chemical attack during the implementation of this agreement? What if the attack is against Israel? What happens if Israel starts a war with Syria? What happens if the entire agreement stalls because the US, France and Britain want Chapter 7 language in the UNSC Resolution and Russia and China are forced to veto it? The entire agreement collapses then, that’s what.

    Wait and see.

  60. Richard Steven Hack says:

    And more…

    Disarming Syria Will Be Long, Difficult, Experts Say

    Like everyone’s going to wait…

  61. Richard Steven Hack says:

    And more…

    U.S. warns diplomatic solution for Syria will take time


    Under that proposal, U.S. action would depend on a U.N. resolution demanding Assad put his chemical weapons under U.N. international control by a certain date. If he failed to do so, Obama would be authorized to use force.


    Other members of Congress said it was vital to maintain the threat of force. Damascus had previously denied it had used such weapons and refused to admit it even had a chemical weapons program.

    “Assad and the Russian backers would not have raised that possibility (of scrapping the weapons) if they did not face the threat of military force, and they are unlikely to follow through if the threat does not remain credible,” Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told a meeting of defense reporters.

    He backed a provision in the French draft of a U.N. Security Council resolution that would open the way for military action if Syria fails to act on the weapons.

    End Quote

    Clearly the goal is to derail the agreement in the UN…

  62. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Listen to this propaganda piece against Putin’s NYT article…

    Putin to Americans: Tread carefully in Syria

    The lede is that Putin’s article supposedly shows that Russia is not serious about the Syria agreement.

    Clearly there is a full-court propaganda campaign against the Russian Syrian agreement even as Obama continues to lobby Congress for authorization for war.

  63. kooshy says:

    Fyi here are nice illuminating pictures for a nice night cap

    دیدار خادمان امام رضا (ع) با موبد آتشکده زرتشتیان در اصفهان

  64. Dan Cooper says:

    fyi says:

    September 12, 2013 at 1:47 pm


    Mr. Zarif on Syria:

    Thank you for the above link.

    It was the first time that I had the opportunity to listen to Mr Zarif.

    He is an experienced diplomat and impressed me enormously.

    I believe Iran’s foreign ministry is in safe hands now.

  65. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 12, 2013 at 7:12 pm


    Is it your response that, in essence, that it is the position of the government of the UK that Iran should not have 20% enrichment because it is a hard agreement to get to, and Mr. Jalili says he does not mind?

    Given that 20% enrichment is a right conferred to all NPT members, your characterization of the UK position appears to be tantamount to: “if we make it hard on those lesser nations, they will concede their rights!”

    I am positive that you will correct me and tell me that it is the position of the UK that international agreements are worthy of preservation in their fullest form. Given the said assumption, I am still left without a clear understanding of your response.

    So, let me refer you to my question again and ask you to directly respond to the specific question; as repeated above, stated earlier, and contextualized yet earlier. Thank you.

  66. kooshy says:

    Paul Roberts explains Putin criticism of Obama’s unilateral disrespect for international law in form of American Exeptionalism very nicely

    Putin Steps Into World Leadership Role
    By Paul Craig Roberts

    “Putin, being diplomatic, was very careful in his criticism of obama’s September 10 speech in which obama sought to justify Washington’s lawlessness in terms of “American exceptionalism.” Obama, attempting to lift his criminal regime by the bootstraps up into the moral heavens, claimed that United States government policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.”

    What obama told Americans is exactly what Hitler told the Germans. The Russians, having borne more than anyone else the full weight of the German war machine, know how dangerous it is to encourage people to think of themselves as exceptional, unbound by law, the Geneva Conventions, the UN Security Council, and humane concerns for others. Putin reminded obama that “God created us equal.”

    If Putin had wanted to give obama the full rebuke that obama deserves, Putin could have said: “obama is correct that the policy of the US government is what makes the US exceptional. The US is the only country in the world that has attacked 8 countries in 12 years, murdering and dispossessing millions of Muslims all on the basis of lies. This is not an exceptionalism of which to be proud.”

  67. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    September 12, 2013 at 2:19 pm
    No it is the west using the excuse of wmd to threaten syria just as it did iraq,when its not funding and training terrorists that is
    James Canning says:
    September 12, 2013 at 2:23 pm
    Had the west acknowledged irans nuclear rights and supplied iran with the trr fuel there would have been no problems instead it was ultimatums,sanctions and threats,hague should blame his fellow western leaders and himself for any failure in that regard

  68. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Lobbying Group for Israel to Press Congress on Syria

    Note this important sentence!

    President Obama urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to get personally involved in lobbying Congress.

    Read that again! Now do you know who works for who? Do you see where Obama’s intentions are now?

  69. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Phil Giraldi’s latest…

    Defeating AIPAC Starts with Syria

  70. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Leaving strike on table, Kerry says Syrian words on arms deal ‘not enough’

  71. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Gee, Obama lied…what a surprise…

    Exclusive: U.S. total of Syrian gas deaths could include bomb casualties – source

  72. Richard Steven Hack says:

    By giving guns to rebels, US tries to squeeze Syrian regime


    “But within the political dynamics, it might have sent much more of a significant message to the international community, to President Assad, and to his supporters like the Russian government,” he told AFP

    End Quote

    In short, it’s a message to Putin…


    In another apparent bid by Washington to ratchet up pressure on the Syrian regime and its Iranian and Russian backers, US officials have held out the possibility of expanding support to the rebels by shifting the effort to the Pentagon from the CIA.

    Officials told AFP last week the idea was under serious consideration, and would result in a larger scale program to supply weapons and vehicles to the rebels.

    End Quote

  73. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Syria crisis: UN receives Syria chemical treaty papers

    Apparently Syria has begun the process of joining the Chemical Weapons Treaty.

    However, note that an inventory of their chemical weapons won’t arrive for a month. I suspect the US will clamor for speedier results and start yelling “delay” almost immediately.

    If the US (and everyone else involved including the insurgents, Prince Bandar and Israel) DOES wait at least another month into October, that would make it likely that my estimate of a military strike before end of this year might have to be pushed over into next year.

  74. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Does a US strike on Syria have a ‘sell by’ date?

    Article discusses what happens if all this drags on.

    Article does NOT discuss what happens if someone else – the insurgents, Bandar, or Israel – decides to “move things along”…which I view as almost inevitable…

  75. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Russia sends missile cruiser to Mediterranean as Syria tension mounts


    According to a scientist working on military research, who asked not to be named, the deployment will put Russia in a position to evacuate its citizens currently in Syria and serve as a deterrent against military actions by Turkey and other players in the region.

    “The demonstration of strength, the demonstration of the flag, is an additional argument for Russia to be seen as important player,” they said. However, the Russian fleet will not be able to stop an American missile or aircraft strike against Syria, they added

    End Quote

  76. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Is Russia toying with US? Missile sale to Iran raises question

    Apparently one Russian paper said S-300 deal was back on; Kremlin denies it.

    This is a good recap of where the deal stands and the geopolitical considerations around it in light of the Syria crisis.

  77. M.Ali says:

    I think one real advantage, for us Iranians, that will come out of this is drive a bigger wedge between Russia and USA. I am almost certain this proposal will fall apart, with each side blaming the other. However, inside Russia, this will strengthen anti-US sentiments (the way Khatami’s pro-USA position failed after his failed appeasement policies).

    This will help us having Russia being a better ally to Iran, not out of love for us, but out of necessity. Once Russia realizes that USA is doesn’t talk in good faith, it would less likely fall for US’s “diplomacy” tricks over Iran.

    Russia learned a big lesson in Libya, when their approval over strikes was taken advantage of, and they didn’t repeat the same mistake over Syria. With this new lesson to be learned, it will carry over Iran.

  78. Sineva says:

    fyi says:
    September 12, 2013 at 8:01 pm
    I agree,there seems to be little of value that the west can offer iran aside from “surrender now and we wont make things even worse”.

  79. BiBiJon says:

    M.Ali says:
    September 13, 2013 at 5:30 am

    “I think one real advantage, for us Iranians, that will come out of this is drive a bigger wedge between Russia and USA.”

    Respectfully, disagree. Echoing Iranian FM (see press tv interview link above) anything that harms the security interests of anyone, will wind up hurting the security interests of everyone.

    Iranian, as well as everybody else’s long term interests will come out of US-Russian Comity. Just thinking about how Iran can be “used” by Russia or US just to hurt the other, is not a place Iran should want to be.

  80. Sakineh Bagoom says:

    “I have also stated that Iran itself did a great deal to wreck Hague’s plans.”

    I see that you are again blaming the victim James. It wasn’t too long ago that you were proudly reporting on your ancestor, lord Canning’s, report to the home office that Iranians were not a ‘threat’, and you failing to mention that this was because they were being murdered en-mass during the Anglo-Iranian war.
    Keep it up. This is not to say that Iranians are not to blame for their own shortcomings. They must insulate themselves against murdering ex-imperialist.
    Please save the leading questions that this comment generates.

  81. BiBiJon says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:11 am

    The article you refer to begins with: “Russia has dispatched a “carrier killer” missile cruiser and other ships to the eastern Mediterranean in its largest naval deployment since Soviet times.”

    But you choose to quote:

    “According to a scientist working on military research, who asked not to be named, the deployment will put Russia in a position to evacuate its citizens currently in Syria and serve as a deterrent against military actions by Turkey and other players in the region.”

    Richard, really? “Carrier Killer” helps evacuation? Counters Turkey?

    Come on man. What is your agenda spamming nonsense here?

  82. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    September 12, 2013 at 8:48 pm

    Yes, it is a very small start – unlike when this Zoroastrian student had joined the Reconstruction Jihad and they put a separate plate for her during lunch time since she was considered ritualistically impure – najis, just like a dog.

    It is high time that the Islamic State among whose allies are syncretic sects of Islam as well other Religions of the Book to develop both a theory and practice of Muslim Ecunemism.

    It might interest you that the Sikh are conceptually closer to Islam than the Alawites with their 3 gods – Allah, Muhammad, and Ali.

  83. Unknown Unknowns says:

    Two zionist left-gatekeepers discuss Iran.

    I like Chomsky’s opening sentence:

    :…for the past 60 years, not a day has passed in which the U.S. has not been torturing Iranians.”

  84. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 9:41 am

    “Yes, it is a very small start – unlike when this Zoroastrian student had joined the Reconstruction Jihad and they put a separate plate for her during lunch time since she was considered ritualistically impure – najis, just like a dog.”

    fyi, I wish you would quit painting people with brush dipped in the jehalat (ignorance) of the tiniest few assholes. Daniel Pipes would be proud.

    You want to badger folks with “Muslim Ecumenism” and being a history buff and all, you might want to brush up on Akbar the Great

  85. BiBiJon says:

    You won’t catch me saying the threat worked to stop the tomahawks

    The head of an Iraqi Hezbollah division armed and advised by the IRGC says it has 23,000 trained fighters ready to attack US interests in Iraq and the Persian Gulf if Syria is attacked.

    General Masoud Jazayeri says Syria will fight ”fire with fire” if attacked. “US allies in the region that provide money, resources and bases for the rebels are in Syria’s range and it is predicted that Syria will retaliate,” he said.”


    Actually, I’d say the threats only work to embarrass the issuer of threats. Counter threats are not much better.

  86. BiBiJon says:

    RSH, Russia seems really serious about evacuation, look!

  87. Fiorangela says:

    fyi says:
    September 12, 2013 at 5:32 pm

    “… Yiddish, a language that NAZIs killed …”

    = = =

    You, fyi, like Mr. Elan, suffer from Hitler Derangement Syndrome©.

    In a series of lectures on Jewish Intellectual History, Prof. David Ruderman told an anecdote about his aunt (?? if I recall correctly; it was some female relative) whose family had lived in Germany for many, many generations. They were tremendously proud of their German language skills and highly disdainful of Yiddish, the language of the Jewish lower class, especially Eastern (i.e. Russian and Polish) Jews. “NAZIs did not “kill” Yiddish; Jews, especially upper-class German Jews and cultural zionists sought to eradicate Yiddish from their cultural background.

    Hitler Derangement Syndrome© is a convenient – and prevalent – means of covering up polar forces and conflicts within the Jewish community. Theodor Herzl and Chaim Weizmann recognized the polar forces that were tearing the Jewish community apart; they ‘sold’ zionism — Herzl to German leaders and Weizmann, more successfully, to British leaders, as “rallying-point for the healthy and constructive forces in Jewish life, as opposed to subversive elements suspected of working underground for the overthrow of the established social order.”

    In a 1921 speech at the Zionist Congress in 1921, Weizmann said,

    ” “Britain . . .understood sooner and better than any other nation that the Jewish Question, which hangs like a shadow over the world, may become a gigantic force of construction or a mighty element of destruction.

    One of the most significant symptoms of HDS© is ascribing causality for a situation to abstractions attributed to “NAZIs” or some cognate rather than carefully assessing all the facts and context of a situation and applying logic to produce a cause-and-effect relationship.

    Mr. Elan displayed HDS© with this statement:

    “. . . the statement that Assad has to go was bad, I agree. … If we take what happened after WWI when Wilson insisted that the Kaiser be deposed, look what took its place, Hitler.”

    Mr. Elan compressed more than 15 years of history in that statement, and still missed a key point –that it is not up to an outsider to say who should lead a sovereign people.

    1. That Wilson said the Kaiser must go may or may not have been the precipitating element that motivated German military leaders to carry out the wishes of a broad swathe of the German people to remove Wilhelm from power.

    2. The German revolution, coincident with Wilhelm’s removal and exile, was, arguably, exploited by elements that were not in sync with the wishes and cultural mores of the majority of the German people

    3. The Weimar government that prevailed for fourteen years or so was never able to develop a stable political climate and was much less able to stabilize Germany’s economy, finances, and employment. The Morsi government was toppled in less than a year because it was unable to stabilize Egypt’s economy and resolve high unemployment, but the German people endured 14 years of drastic unemployment, hyperinflation, and an economic situation so bad the thousands of people once again starved to death.

    4. Wilson’s assertion, to the extent that it was determinative, was thus separated by an entire era from, “what we got – Hitler.”

    5. Some facts about the accomplishments of Hitler and the NSDAP:
    a. DID unify the German people in a positive and non-sectarian, pro-German movement
    b. DID quell anti-Jewish gang violence (see Breitman & Lichtman, “FDR and the Jews,”) in spite of the fact that within a very few days of the NSDAP taking power, “International Jewry” declared an economic war on Germany.
    c. DID achieve full employment
    d. DID put the efforts of German labor to the project of building Germany’s infrastructure – NSDAP built the majority of Germany’s autobahn, the model for the US interstate highway system; and as Herbert Hoover noted in “Freedom Betrayed,” NSDAP created dramatic improvements in housing for Germany’s lower and working classes.

    (nb. HDS© causes those afflicted with the syndrome to respond to the information above with epithets like “anti-semite” and “Nazi-lover” and “traitor”.)

    The critical point that Elan failed to grasp: It was not up to Wilson to decide who should govern Germany, just as it is not up to Obama to decide who should govern Syria and it is not up to the “west” or the US Congress or Ephraim Sneh who said “Iran must be secular” or to the US president to determine who and how Iran should be governed.

    As is the case with many viral infections, the best antidote to HDS© is sunlight: exposure of the lies of HDS© to the bright light of public awareness, coupled with the counter-narrative of facts and logic, must eventually correct the disorder. The alternative, to allow HDS© to go untreated, can only result in violence, war, and death. As Iran’s Foreign Minister Zarif said in a PressTV interview the other day:

    “some countries are unhappy that we are avoiding a war. I don’t know what extension of logic can in fact be used by our friends in the region who are unhappy that a diplomatic avenue is being sought and hopefully found in order to avoid a major catastrophe on their doorsteps, a major catastrophe that will lead to extremism, will lead to sectarian divide, will lead to further conflict in our region, just for a short-sighted interest to change the balance of forces inside Syria through more bloodshed, more killing of innocent people.”

  88. Fiorangela says:

    addendum: Quotations re Weizmann & Herzl are from “The Balfour Declaration,” by Leonard Stein, 1961, pp. 22-23.

  89. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    September 13, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    Thank you for your comments.

    All that you have posted is consistent with what I had observed earlier – an obsession with Jews by Christians through the course of the existence of Christianity.

    I do not obsess with Jews or anyone else – say Jains, or Sikhs or Yazidis.

  90. kooshy says:

    fyi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 9:41 am


    With my experience, what you are generalizing as Iranians behavior toward other religions does not add up. I know something about Zoroastrians, all my elementary school years I attended a Zoroastrian school (I guess since in my family it was trusted because it was the only school in old Tehran run by Yazdies).

    Due to its location in central Tehran Jamshied e Jam boys elementary school was about 80% Zoroastrian and the rest a mix of Muslims, some Armenian christens and a few Jewish Iranians, as far as I remember my 6 years of schooling there we all played , fought, studied, attended each-others home even fought with Armenian boys attending Kouroush Armenian boys school across the street, without feeling any different or superior to anybody. I don’t think anybody was or ever felt is exceptional or was discriminated.

    All my life as an burn Iranian Muslim I never felt any different than Iranians of any religion , locality, ethnicity etc. did you, if you didn’t should you reply in a way that looks like this is a general behavior of Iranians , I thin not, that like American journalism is dishonest.


  91. Fiorangela says:

    I was so depressed last night thinking about
    the economy, wars, jobs, my savings, Social Security,
    retirement funds, etc., I called the Suicide Lifeline.

    I got a call center in Pakistan, and when I told them I was
    suicidal, they got all excited, and asked if I could
    drive a truck.

    h/t MCS

  92. James Canning says:


    I will say this again: Iran’s announcement of INTENT to treble production of 20U convinced some powerful Gulf Arabs that Iran would sadly bring war to the Gulf.

    You doubt this?

    You think the civil war in Syria had nothing to do with Gulf Arab fears of war in the Gulf?

  93. James Canning says:


    Define the “surrender” you claim the West demands of Iran. Be specific.

  94. Fiorangela says:

    fyi, you may or may not “obsess.” I haven’t read that many of your comments to know one way or the other.

    but you did evaluate my comment irrationally.

    I pointed out that you were wrong on the facts.

    because you were.

  95. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    September 13, 2013 at 11:57 am

    Akbar the great failed because there was no system of thought – rooted in Islamic Thought – that could sustain his program during his life, let alone after he died.

    Now, I would like to draw your attention to the following videos.

    Azeri and Kazakh students in Sheffield were celebrating Nowruz 1392 (2013).

    Sheffield, as I am sure you know, is in England, the country with the longest history of constitutional rule and representative government; where “Liberal Democracy” is on its death bed and is going to die any day now.

    Of course, it is quite evident that:
    1. These young people are very very bad and ugly Muslims – if “real” Muslims at all.
    2. That the young women are border-line harlots.
    3. That the young men are not that far from being dishonorable whore-mongers.
    4. At any moment these corrupt young people would be taking off their clothes and walk around naked.
    5. That there is a need for the security organs of the Islamic State to come in and beat there deviant bad/ugly Muslims into True Islam.
    6. In the absence of the security organs of the Islamic State, ordinary Muslim should take the “Law” into their own hands and disrupt these corrupt proceedings.

  96. James Canning says:


    I think Britain comprehends that it is impossible for Obama, in terms of domestic American politics, to agree to Iranian enrichment to 20.

    What do you think about the accuracy of this assessment, by the UK?

    If Obama cannot agree to 20, what possible point is served by demanding he do so? Unless one simply does not want an agreement to be achieved.

  97. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    September 13, 2013 at 1:01 pm

    You evidently have not watched sermons in the mosques denigrating Zoroastrians, and Jews, and Christians.

    You did not experience how people refuse to touch this young boy because his mother is American and thus a ritualistically impure Christian.

    You were not in that bus in 1976 going to the stadium for Asian Games when the entire bus was shouting “Death to Jews” making no distinction between the state of Israel and the Jews.

    Lastly, it is a delicious irony of histroy that the Islamic Republic of Iran has become the defender of the trinitrian Alwaites.

    The world is an amazing place.

  98. James Canning says:


    I agree with you that Iran’s application to buy TRR fuel should have been approved. I have said a number of times that blocking this application may have been part of a scheme to force Iran to enrich to 20, in hopes of blocking any improvement of America’s relations with Iran. MAY have been.

  99. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    September 13, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    I beg to differ, it is you who is factually wrong.

    Poland, Romania, Hungary – the Jews were muredered and with that their language.

    German Jews might have disdained the rural Jews but they dod not kill Yiddish.

    NAZIs did.

  100. James Canning says:

    Dan Cooper,

    Zarif does come across very well in that piece linked by FYI.

  101. masoud says:

    fyi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    Give it a fucking break already, England doesn’t have a constitution. It’s ruled by a hereditary monarch who by virtue of that position is simultaneously the head of it’s state church.

    Can you and James Canning stop the noise pollution already? It’s more than a little nauseating.

  102. James Canning says:

    R S Hack,

    What a spectacle, that Obama would urge Netanyahu to press the US Congress to allow a war with Syria.

    And how many Aipac agents were working Capitol Hill in effort to embroil American in yet anouther war? Three hundred? More?

  103. James Canning says:


    A hereditary monarch has not ruled Britan for three centuries. You don’t know this?

  104. James Canning says:


    England has had a constitution for many centuries. You should know this.

  105. BiBiJon says:

    fyi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    You are an incredibly intolerant character. How you portray who yo imagine to be Islamic zealots, leaves little room for gauging the level of your phobia, the intensity of your hate-filled intolerance. Providence forbid you having the power to act on your ugly, made up beliefs.

    You are all about appearances.

    I recall well when Iranian women footballers were intolerantly discriminated against in Jordan, you reserved your frequent braying shame, shame, shame, not for the Jordanian, or FIFA bigots, but for the Muslim sportswomen.

    Keep your rancid prejudices to yourself.

  106. James Canning says:


    Russia and China do not regard the NPT as a “dead letter”. I think you are mistaken in believing Iran can simply work around whatever additional sanctions are imposed if no deal is made with P5+1.

  107. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    September 13, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    Not at all – I am very tolernat – I accept everyone to be a Muslim and do not arrogate to myself God’s preogatives.

    بهشت آنجاست که آزاری نباشد
    کسی را با کسی کاری نباشد

  108. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 13, 2013 at 1:33 pm

    How do you know that?

  109. fyi says:

    masoud says:

    September 13, 2013 at 1:25 pm

    The unwritten English constituition has been the most successful one.

    It is essentially a collection of Customs and Laws.

    USSR also had a written constitution; “the most democractic one in the world” according to the late Joseph Stalin.

    But it was just a sham.

  110. James Canning says:

    John McCain claims to have been “insulted” by Putin’s sensible comments in New York Times Sept 11. What a surprise.

  111. Unknown Unknowns says:

    Methinks that our Resident Christianesque Orientalist (aka fyi) crying foul about Moslem prejudice in Oslem lands is too rich by half. Was it not just the other day that Putin saved the lives of tens and possibly hundreds of thousands of Syrians from the extreme prejudice of Weaselistani missiles? Or, how long has it been since that Jewish hag Albright beemed that “we” think the treatment of 500,000 Iraqi children with extreme prejudice (and subsequent death) was “worth it”? Puh-leeeeze.

    And oh, BiBiJon-san: the pictures of those Russian warships must be a conjuring trick of some sort, because Russia does not need to resort to such inconvenient behavior to protect her vital interests: she has nuclear weapons! Your move ;o)

  112. James Canning says:


    Chinese president visited the Gulf and told Arab leaders China was opposed to Iranian enrichment to 20 and that Iran needed to make a deal with P5+1. I think Russia and China make clear they regard NPT as highly important.

  113. James Canning says:

    Unknown Unknowns,

    Was Albright “Jewish”? Yes, she had Jewish ancestry. But says she did not know about it until late in life.

  114. James Canning says:

    The Fiancial Times reported today that Russia continues to work with the US in effort to ensure Iran does not build nukes. Which of course is correct.

  115. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    An “unwritten” constitution is not worth the paper it is not written on…

  116. BiBiJon says:

    fyi (Daniel Pipes) says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    In the heaven you describe, where no one bothers anyone else, there would not be an fyi insulting Muslims, by definition.

  117. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 13, 2013 at 1:56 pm

    Neither China nor Russia can do anything to prevent a US (Axis Powers) attack on Iran.

    The most you could expect is that they would not let Iran get defeated by re-supplying her – sort of like the Lend-Lease.

    Security of Iran can only be guaranteed through her own efforts and capabilities.

    The NPT bargain is dead, just like the Peace of Yalta and UN.

    You would know otherwise when there is another international conference such as the one in San Francisco which establiehed the UN.

    Until then, it is my opinion and judgement that Iranian state is vulnerable to destruction.

    The events of the last 15 days have established that quite clealry.

  118. BiBiJon says:

    Nobel peace prize for …… Putin

  119. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:

    September 13, 2013 at 2:09 pm

    I have a very simple and elegant proposal:

    Accept that everyone is a Muslim and leave the determination of what is in their hearts to God.

    But no, that is not whatwe are facing – we are experiencing attacks on the persons of Muslims in the Muslim world because some other Muslims do not find them sufficiently Islamic.

    Well, are they God?

    Did the Prophets give them credentials to adjudicate among Muslims?

    Did Khezr or the 12-th Imam deputize them to harass Muslims and violate their intrinsic rights and their human dignity?

    I think not.

  120. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    BibiJon, kooshy-jan,

    Forget it- he’s kos-khol and ogde-i living in his own fantasy world as it relates to Iran and Islam. All it would take is for him to come hang out in Iran for 1 year-18 months.

    His refusal to do so is telling. He prefers the safety of his fantasy world to reality.

  121. kooshy says:

    fyi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:47 pm

    “The unwritten English constituition has been the most successful one.”

    That may also work for you “unwritten” thoughts, give it a try

  122. James Canning says:


    Extensive commentary is available on the unwritten English constitution.

  123. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    September 13, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    You and others like you have no answers – nothing for the young people anyway.

    I imagine you have utterly forgotten how it felt to be young.

  124. James Canning says:


    I have said I think it unlikely that the US will attack Iran unless Iran attacks US assets (or assets of allies). And that I would expect a blockade of Iranian oil exports, in US effort to achieve a deal. If none is reached.

  125. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 13, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    State security cannot be predicated on “unlikely” estimations.

    US revelaed her hand this past 2 weeks.

    The lesson for Iran is not if US will attack but when US will attack.

    This much has been established.

  126. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:
    September 13, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    “Extensive commentary is available on the unwritten English constitution.”


    Here on GTT blog, we all know Brits love “extensive commentary” do agree?
    Never less sometimes I wished instead of extensive commentary we could get more substantive commentary from our Brit friend.

  127. Sakineh Bagoom says:

    Sakineh Bagoom says:
    Please save the leading questions that this comment generates.

    James Canning says:
    You doubt this?
    You think the civil war in Syria had nothing to do with Gulf Arab fears of war in the Gulf?

    Daftness to the max.
    Man, what a waste of language on you. Surely you speak English.

  128. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:56 pm

    “Chinese president visited the Gulf and told Arab leaders China was opposed to Iranian enrichment to 20 and that Iran needed to make a deal with P5+1.”

    Gav James

    Can you please post a link and a reference for this story; if you do I really appreciate it, and if you can’t find one please state so.


  129. Karl.. says:


    “You think the civil war in Syria had nothing to do with Gulf Arab fears of war in the Gulf?”

    I need to see a source on this, could you post one please?

  130. Fiorangela says:

    fyi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    Yes, the Nazis are blamed for a lot of things — that is the essence of HDS© .

    To sustain your charge that “Poland, Romania, Hungary – the Jews were muredered and with that their language.”

    and that

    “NAZIs” were solely and entirely responsible for it, you are going to have to provide some
    — proof that Yiddish is dead.
    — proof that NAZIs — not i.e. Russians, not other Hungarians, — “murdered” Jews and thus their language.

    — cite the full context

    — factor in the zionist urgency that Jews speak Hebrew, not Yiddish. In a 2007 conference, an aid to Shimon Peres said that Russian immigrants to Israel insist on retaining their own language and cultural traditions and are resisting learning Hebrew, but their children are being taught Hebrew in schools, so eventually the Russian community in Israel will speak Hebrew — not Russian. Did zionism similarly play a role in the “murder” of Yiddish, an act which you ascribe to the all-purpose “evil NAZIs”?

    + + +

    You made some hare-brained comment about Christians being obsessed with Jews.

    My argument has nothing to do with Christianity or Judaism; it has to do with rational assessment of causes and outcomes involving political groups, and the necessity to assess situations based on facts, evidence, and logic, not on knee-jerk generalizations.

    The context is political, not religious.

    The topic is, in my view, essential to understand the current situation of US foreign policy — and I write as an American of only citizen-taxpayer status, not a decision maker or policy shaper. As an ordinary American I have a right and a duty to understand what my country is doing and to call it out when it is going astray. The US government has powerful means to “educate” the public to gain their support for actions the gov. wishes to take for whatever reasons.

    I have very few levers of power, but I DO have the ability to examine the processes used to educate me & fellow citizens, and to try to expose what I perceive to be errors. The area that I am “obsessed” to explore involves interrelations among zionists, American government, and sovereign foreign states, particularly Iran — you know, standard water-cooler chat.

    When folks like you can respond only by parroting your ideological biases, I learn two things:
    1. that I have struck a nerve — there is something that has made the hearer/reader uncomfortable
    2. I must continually refine my means of address and persuasion in order to be more effective.

    So thanks for the motivation.

  131. BiBiJon says:

    Gift to Asia is wrapped in Silk


  132. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    September 13, 2013 at 3:26 pm

    It would be difficult for you to struck a nerve in me.

    I am telling you things as I understand them.

    You can take the trouble of searching for yourself and find out how Yiddish died; there is plenty of publicly available information on the Internet.

    If you do not see, cannot see, or refuse to see the obsession of Christains with Jews through Christian history I cannot help you there.

    It is like refusing to acknowledge noon-day sun.

  133. James Canning says:


    You haven’t been following any of the comments about Prince Bandar bin Sultan on this site?

    What is your assessment of Prince Bandar’s reasons for seeking the overtrhrow of the Syrian government?

  134. James Canning says:


    I will check for a link. The Chinese president’s visit to the Gulf got a fair amount of press coverage.

  135. Richard Steven Hack says:

    BiBiJon: “Richard, really? “Carrier Killer” helps evacuation?” Counters Turkey? Come on man. What is your agenda spamming nonsense here?”

    Look, stupid. If you haven’t been paying attention to the fact that most of the Russian ships in the Med right now are landing craft and other ships designed to aid evacuation, I can’t help you.

    The missile cruiser is there as the Russians said: to back up the other ships if necessary. Of course, it’s a minor threat to the US Navy as well – but Russia is not going to launch missiles from a single Russian missile cruiser at a US carrier battle group.

    Don’t be an idiot.

  136. James Canning says:


    Perhaps I need to state what happened more succinctly. Saudi Arabian leaders feared Iran would force war in the Gulf, due to dispute over nuclear programme. To injure Iran, the Saudis decided to take out Bashar al-Assad.

    Iran’s announcement of intent to treble production of 20U was a major blunder, even if this fact is something you find annoying.

  137. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 13, 2013 at 4:10 pm

    Arabs took Axis Powers guys for a ride; making them support their “Hanbali-zation of Levant” project under the rubric of “Wound Iran”.

    Axis Powers, in effect, became allies of Al Qaeda against a secular dictatorship.

    But, by the Grace of God, this resulted in the consolidation of the Shia Crescent.

    And thus the Axis Powers and Arabs had to create an incident to attack and destroy the Ba’ath State in Syria.

    Which they did; killing hundreds of Muslims – “They were not our people – Hanbalis”.

    The people of the United Kingdom and the President of the Russian Federation stopped that war.

    Or at least they delayed it.

    After Syria, it was the turn of the Islamic Republic of Iran to be destroyed.

    One must be grateful to Providence for exposing the Axis Powers intentions for all to see.

  138. kooshy says:

    With regard to Mr. Putin’ op-ed that is deliberately trying to destroy the UN that she herself was instrumental to establish

    In reality since the fall of USSR the US doesn’t like the current format of the UN specially the UNSC. Simply the reason is, because 2 out of 5 veto holding permanent members are not her client states and unlike UK and France they are not economically or militarily weak to be tamed to submission under US’s weight. Truly US policy makers see the UN as an unwanted burden that can prevent them implementing their wishes on other states. Since the end of cold war UN is no longer useful for the Americans imperialistic world view. They see time to time UNSC can and is forcing them even if superficial to adjust their world view and polices, or even as has become more evident stop or redirect their dictates to the world. For this reason since the fall of USSR without any respect to UN charter and international laws which they themselves were instrumental to create have conducted numerous illegal wars and interferences throughout the world. With an ultimate goal and hope that eventually China or Russia or both to give up on UN and international organizations and exit and dismantle.

    On the other hand for Chinese and Russian and the rest of world community currently there exist no other legal restrain (no matter how broken it might be) to leash up the Americans and her client states of France and UK. This is why what Mr. Putin just did with regard to Syria deserves a prize, because he is forcing the Americans to come to an international table and accept their vote is just as any based on the rule of law they signed on to. So far like Mr. Zarif said in Baghdad the “Americans accepted to take all options off the table 60 years ago” if Iran , Russia and Chinese can make them accept that again by forming a new front that only requires UN resoloutions they have done many goods for the world.

  139. Fiorangela says:

    fyi says:
    September 13, 2013 at 3:52 pm

    fyi, if the topic were the Christian obsession with Jews, I would research it and discuss it. I might even have written a comment about it and addressed it to you to chew on as you sit in your shop and light incense sticks and collect utility bills.

    My comment had nothing whatsoever to do with Christian-Jewish relations, obsessions, recessions, confessions or impressions. Nothing.

    My comment was about the pervasive failure of so many Americans — and people like you — to make judgments and form opinions based on FACTS AND EVIDENCE rather than knee-jerk propaganda-informed ideologically-biased reactions. You continue to prove the point.

  140. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    September 13, 2013 at 4:28 pm

    You are criticizing the wrong guy; I am extremely well-informed and my opinios are based on distillation of numerous facts.

    But facts do not contain insights – it takes a human mind to discover insights – which inform my opinoins.

  141. Karl.. says:


    Do you have a link to this statement:

    ““You think the civil war in Syria had nothing to do with Gulf Arab fears of war in the Gulf?””

    Or are you making up as usual?

  142. BiBiJon says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:
    September 13, 2013 at 4:10 pm

    Hey moron,

    Why don’t the evacuees just jump on a plane and leave?

  143. BiBiJon says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:
    September 13, 2013 at 4:10 pm

    also for the moron,

    Did you check this out?

  144. M.Ali says:

    “I am extremely well-informed and my opinios are based on distillation of numerous facts.”

    This needs no comment, but just requires a copy and paste so I can laugh at it. Haha.

  145. Sakineh Bagoom says:

    James Canning says: September 13, 2013 at 4:10 pm

    James, stop deflecting and stop acting stupid. My post was about your quote about Hague.
    Here it is for your reference again: “I have also stated that Iran itself did a great deal to wreck Hague’s plans.”
    It had nothing to do with Wahabistan. Regardless of how succinctly you want to put it. SA does not have an independent foreign policy. They listen, say, do, and kowtow to their overlords in Whitehall and Foggy Bottom. They buy billions of dollars worth of useless arms from US/UK, which immediately rust in the sand as soon it hits the ground, because their overlords tell them what to do with their money. SA depends on its very being on the patronage of Americans.
    So you seem to have it bass ackwards James. It is not the Wahabis who tell Hague what to think. It’s the other way around.
    I’ve previously provided you with links on Hague’s plans, all of which was to hurt Iran. Don’t make me dig those posts up.

  146. BiBiJon says:

    Christiane Amanpour will be collecting unemployment benefit sooner than Susan Rice

    h/t Anonymous @ MoA

  147. James Canning says:


    I have said many times that the huge expenditures on weapons by Gulf monarchies is not something I welcome. But, if the money is going to be spent, I prefer it be spent in the UK rather than China.

    Iran convninced William Hague that Iran was willing to bring war to the Gulf. This is at the heart of what I say was Iran’s “wrecking” of Hague’s plans to improve relations.

    You discount too much the degree to which Gulf monarchies wield influence in Britain.

  148. nico says:


    Herman Melville’s “white-jacket”published in 1850.

    It provides interesting insight into like-minded people mental illness and into US group/mass people dynamic thinking.

    In addition it gives in a nutshell proof of the clear parenthood of protestantism and judaism
    Actually protestantism is closer to judaism than catholicism in that in judaism and protestantism the believer thinks he is chosen or elected by god.
    In judaism and protestantism the believer thinks he is above the non believer.
    Protestant and more so judaism are racist religions.

    To the opposite, catholics think they are creatures of god, like all that exist that is god creation.

    I guess the true devision is between exceptionalists and universalists.
    I guess in Islam the wahabis are the exceptionalists.

    Now you to guess why jews, protestants and wahabis are in bed !

    Escaped from the house of bondage, Israel of old did not followafter the ways of the Egyptians. To her was given an expressdispensation; to her were given new things under the sun. And weAmericans are the peculiar, chosen people–the Israel of ourtime; we bear the ark of the liberties of the world. Seventyyears ago we escaped from thrall; and, besides our firstbirthright–embracing one continent of earth–God has given tous, for a future inheritance, the broad domains of the politicalpagans, that shall yet come and lie down under the shade of ourark, without bloody hands being lifted. God has predestinated,mankind expects, great things from our race; and great things wefeel in our souls. The rest of the nations must soon be in ourrear. We are the pioneers of the world; the advance-guard, senton through the wilderness of untried things, to break a new pathin the New World that is ours. In our youth is our strength; inour inexperience, our wisdom. At a period when other nations havebut lisped, our deep voice is heard afar. Long enough, have webeen skeptics with regard to ourselves, and doubted whether,indeed, the political Messiah had come. But he has come in us, ifwe would but give utterance to his promptings. And let us alwaysremember that with ourselves, almost for the first time in thehistory of earth, national selfishness is unbounded philanthropy;for we can not do a good to America but we give alms to the world.”

  149. nico says:


    Good you have the answer…

    Yes, the wahabi, the anglo-protestant and the zionist jews are of the same kind of extremist exceptionalists.

    No need to say that they are the same kind of terrorist (state or non state) and inquisitary thugs.